Re: Intent to revive "expires" header from draft-ietf-mailext-new-fields-15

Michael Welzl wrote:

> We even already fulfil the standard IETF requirement of
> having two independent implementations:
> * one by Microsoft (not really standard conforming, but
>   still the same functionality)

Having a non-interoperable *different* idea is fortunately
not any "IETF requirement" I'm aware of... ;-)

> Please let us know what you think!

You would have to merge stuff from 2822upd for the general
syntax, check out:

<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-resnick-2822upd>

Then grab the equivalent NetNews header field syntax without
changing a single comma in it (for interoperability):

<http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-usefor-usefor>

That is an approved RFC waiting for its number.  It is also
the source for the IANA registration of the Expires: header
field for NetNews.  (See section 3.2.5 and chapter 6)

There is one subtlety with the obsolete 2822(upd) syntax in
this RFC, see section 3.1.1.  Better stick to it, don't try
to create theoretical nightmares for news2mail gateways. ;-)

> if this is even the right place for this kind of discussion

Yes.  When your draft is in shape you can ask for a review
on the message-header list.  If you stick to the course "we
only want this existing news header field also for mail" it
should be simple (= less than three years to get the RFC :-)

 Frank